42 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
A popular campaign finance reform bill that would ban congressional candidates and political parties for raising unlimited "soft money" contributions and make other changes to campaign funding faces an uncertain future in the House of Representatives today, with a final vote scheduled for no later than Friday.\nHouse support has been dwindling since the Senate passed its version of the legislation, the McCain-Feingold bill, April 2. Republican Senator John McCain (Ariz.) had made campaign finance reform, an idea that polls show is popular among American voters, the centerpiece of an unsuccessful run for the Republican presidential nomination last year. He vowed then to halt all Senate action through procedural motions until the bill he co-sponsored with Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wisc.) passed that body. \nAnd after a fight in the Senate, it did pass, 59-41, with Indiana's Senators Richard Lugar (R) and Evan Bayh (D) voting in favor.\nIronically, the House passed similar measures banning soft money in both 1998 and 1999. But both times members of Congress knew their colleagues in the Senate would keep the measure from becoming law. That meant they could support the reform measure, use it in campaign speeches during election season, and still continue to raise and spend soft money for their political parties.\nLiberal Democrats have been successful in raising soft money in the last few years, especially with the help of former President Bill Clinton, and without it, they would fall even further behind their Republican Party rivals in fund-raising revenue. The bill under consideration would increase the limits on regulated "hard money" contributions, which Republicans have done a vastly better job at raising in the past than Democrats.\nThe lobbying efforts have focused this week on two groups of traditionally liberal groups of Democrats: blacks and Hispanic lawmakers. Rep. Martin T. Meehan of Massachusetts, the Democrats' chief sponsor of the bill, said Tuesday that his coalition was "not only making sure that we appease the black caucus, but making sure we don't create a loophole in the process" that would permit soft money to flow back into campaign war chests. Half of then 36-member Congressional Black Caucus has committed its support to the bill, but that's far fewer votes than in the past from the group. All but three supported the bill in previous years.\nRep. John Lewis (D) of Georgia, an outspoken supporter of the Shays-Meehan bill, said of his fellow Caucus members, "More than any other group in Congress, we should be for reform, for a way to level the political process. I don't understand some of my colleagues."\n"Soft money is polluting the political process," he said.\nBut some analysts argue that the bill would hurt Democrats, who are already millions of dollars behind Republicans each year in contributions, while helping Republicans.\nSoft money revenues from unlimited contributions that are made to the parties by corporations, unions, and individuals have skyrocketed in the last decade.\n"Total soft-money donations grew from about $45 million in the 1988 presidential campaign, when contributors exploited the loopholes in the election law to great effect, to $500 million in the campaign cycle that ended in November's elections," according to a July 10 article in The New York Times.\nOther provisions in the bill may also help Republican candidates.\nLimits on direct contributions to candidates rise under H.R. 380, the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform bill. Political action committees (PACs) could contribute $10,000 per election to each candidate, twice that allowed under current law. The current limit of $25,000 per year that individuals can spend on hard money on all candidates combined rises to $30,000.\nA key provision, but little talked about, would limit the amounts candidates could spend on their own campaigns, currently unlimited, to $50,000 per election. Several senators were elected in the last few years having used millions of their own dollars to finance their campaigns, money used mainly for expensive television advertisements.\nSenator Jon S. Corzine (D) of New Jersey was elected last year by doing just that. Many reform-minded voters believe unlimited personal contributions give an unfair advantage to wealthy candidates. If passed, the provision is not likely to stand-up to court challenges based on the First Amendment's right to free speech. The Supreme Court has said Congress cannot limit candidates' expenditures on their own behalf.\nEven if campaign finance reform supporters manage to pass Shays-Meehan this week, it still faces a veto threat from the White House.\nIt's way past time to reform the way our nation funds it's political campaigns. Let's hope enough members of Congress see Shays-Meehan as the vastly better alternative it is to current law.\nOur congressman, John Hostettler (R), can be reached by phone at (202) 225-4636 by fax at (202) 225-3284, or via E-mail at John.Hostettler@mail.house.gov.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
The central African country of Zaire is plagued by lost opportunities, squandered resources and waste, in journalist Michela Wrong's portrayal of its history during Mobutu Sese Seko's 32-year unencumbered reign over it.\n"In Mobutu's hands, the country had become a paradigm of all that was wrong with postcolonial Africa," Wrong writes in "In the Footsteps of Mr. Kurtz: Living on the Brink of Disaster in Mobutu's Congo," (HarperCollins, 2001, $26.00). "It was a parody of a functioning state. Here, the anarchy and absurdity that simmered in so many other sub-Saharan nations were taken to their logical extreme."\nWrong's book is both a biography of Mobutu and a historical account of the damage he so ably inflicted on his people, just as had been done so well by his predecessors. In fact, Wrong seems to suggest that a long history of exploitation by the West was almost as much to blame as Mobutu.\nMobutu came to power after the Belgian Congo, as Zaire was called under the Belgians' watch, decolonized and he served revolutionary-turned-president Patrice Lumumba as his military commander. Upon Lumumba's death, Mobutu successfully consolidated power -- which was to remain unquestioned for decades, until rebels drove him from power in 1997.\nEven this transition of power was influenced by the West. Although, as the CIA station chief for Zaire tells Wrong, the CIA did plot to remove Lumumba from power via a vial of poison, he ultimately died out of the Agency's hands. Mobutu's ascension to power was supported by the United States and other Western governments, together adding over $9.3 billion in "foreign aid" to Congo from 1975 to 1997.\nBut for the decades before self-rule, on which Wrong spends considerable effort and attention for uninformed readers (say, those not members of Oprah's Book Club, which has featured Barbara Kingsolver's "The Poisonwood Bible," a novel set in the Belgian Congo during its struggle for independence), the people and land of Congo were milked for all they were worth. Originally the private property of a Belgian monarch, King Leopold II, Congo was exploited for its rubber and used to supply a new tire industry, costing the lives of as many as 10 million African workers.\nWrong sets off from the beginning of her book to paint Western colonialists in a negative light, and to set the literary world straight. Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness," a novella written after his time there in the 1890s as a steamship captain, is where the "Mr. Kurtz" in Wrong's title can be found. Wrong notes that many people have come to believe Kurtz's dying words, "the horror, the horror," were regarding the savagery of the African people, some of whom in Congo at least engaged in cannibalism. She writes that Conrad was "more preoccupied with rotten Western values, the white man's inhumanity to the black man, than, as is almost always assumed today, black savagery."\nPerhaps because she's a journalist who has spent years covering Zaire for the BBC, Reuters, and The Financial Times, Wrong does a superb job at recounting events. Her book lacks a complete solution for a renewal and healing of the Congolese landscape. But that wasn't what she set out to give her readers. It seems she wanted to make us aware of our Western governments' collective betrayal of a land and people so abused by our greed and disregard for life.\nZaire is full of copper, cobalt, uranium, diamonds, rubber, and other valuable resources to the West. They are resources that could have been used to feed millions of hungry people, but instead millions died. It's time for the United States and other Western states to come together in an attempt to solve some of Africa's difficult problems. Problems the West certainly helped create.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
Interns in Washington, D.C., engage in a variety of activities, both at their internships and on their own time in our nation's capital city. But whatever menial or exciting their experiences at the office are, several recent interns from IU agree that Washington is where it's at.\nAnd scandals involving interns and politicians had little effect on their experiences, with only the occasional friend making a snide remark about former White House intern Monica Lewinski, whose relationship with former President Bill Clinton eventually lead to his impeachment.\nSenior Ben Piper, who interned for Congressman Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), said "the Lewinski and Levy matters have hurt the images of politicians, not interns." \n"There are good people in government, but integrity isn't news. The Lewinski scandal didn't affect my internship," he added.\nThe day-to-day work interns perform is varied, from clerical tasks to research and policy development. \n"I wasn't just a lowly intern," said Mitch Mitchell, a SPEA senior who interned for the Health Insurance Association of America spring semester. "I was treated like I was staff. They put me on projects and sent me to meetings."\nEven among students working on Capitol Hill, one could spend her or his days attending committee meetings or doing legislative research, while another answers constituent letters, does the office's filing, and sorts mail. Each day tasks assigned are different for most interns: sometimes exciting, other times not so exciting. \n"Different offices have very different ways they treat interns," Piper said.\nMitchell said the highlight of his time in Washington was meeting the founder of Napster, Sean Fanning. Fanning was at a rally Mitchell attended the day before congressional hearings were scheduled on Napster's future.\nMitchell volunteered the morning of the hearings to pass out t-shirts and coffee to supporters, who marched from a restaurant to Capitol Hill before the hearings. \n"I got a t-shirt and badges saying 'Napster Staff,'" Mitchell said.\nBut most of a congressional intern's time is spent doing clerical tasks. \nLydia Roll, a political science senior who worked for Congressman John Hostettler (R-Ind.), said she spent a day going through old files in cages on the top floor of the Longworth House Office Building. \n"I learned how government really works, not how you read about it in U.S. history books," said Roll.\nShe noted the important role of congressional staff members on public policy. "Congress is not just 535 people. It's a lot more than that," Roll said.\nJunior Ricki Siri, a SPEA public finance major, said that his internship for Indiana Senator Evan Bayh (D), was a great experience.\nSiri said that his most exciting moment in Washington was shaking the hand of Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), who ran for vice president on the Democratic ticket last year.\n Washington, Siri said, is the center of the universe, because unlike his hometown of South Bend, people read about what happens in Washington every day. \n Many students who choose to intern in Washington face a tough economic situation: almost all are unpaid, and the cost of living in the Washington metropolitan area is one of the highest in the country. Rent alone for shared apartments can run as much as $2,000 per month. \nAdditionally, almost all interns receive academic credit for their internships, for which they pay the University regular tuition.\nOn top of full-time tuition, Mitchell paid $1,900 to live with three other interns in an Alexandria, Va., apartment for four months. That was money Mitchell had accumulated beforehand, anticipating a costly semester with no income. \n"Most (of the money) was from my savings from work," he said. Mitchell added that his mother helped him out with the occasional $50 when needed.\nPiper called the George Washington University dorm in which he lived -- just two blocks from the White House -- expensive. It was around $750 per month.\nDespite the expense, most students who take a summer or semester to intern in Washington, whether for government or another organization, say it was well-worth the time and money spent. \n"I racked up credit card bills, but it was worth every cent," Roll said.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
The nature of how our military engages in war is changing, Michael Ignatieff convincingly argues in his book "Virtual War: Kosovo and Beyond" (Metropolitan Books: New York, 2000, $23). For all the talk we hear about investing in new technology and weapons by military brass and the Bush Administration, the 78-day NATO bombing campaign waged against Slobodan Milosevic's Yugoslavia during the Clinton years showed just how questionable such seemingly victorious action can be. \nAs in his two prior books, "Blood and Belonging" and "The Warrior's Honor," Ignatieff spends his ink in "Virtual War," as he says, critiquing "the way Western governments have used military power to protect human rights since the end of the Cold War." He blames "the inability of governments to back principle with decisive military force," for our reluctance to engage in humanitarian missions around the world out of fear of casualties among our soldiers.\nThe central issue in Ignatieff's 246-page indictment of Western governments is determining why nations remain so reluctant to wage war at a time when they are more immune than ever from the risks of doing so.\nIn December 1998 the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, of which the United States is a member state, grappled with the question of whether to intervene in what some viewed as a sovereign country's internal affairs and others saw as a conflict with a considerable destabilizing effect on neighboring states, through massive flows of refugees out of Kosovo. Ignatieff, a London-based journalist and author, writes that then-United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan believed that American leadership could bring stability to the Balkans. NATO chose to make one final attempt to broker a peace agreement between the two sides. On January 31, 1999, NATO "authorized air-strikes against Serbia if it did not agree to talks with Kosovar leaders," Ignatieff writes. \nOn March 24, after the negotiations at the French château of Rambouillet failed, NATO began air operations against Serbia. \nIgnatieff guides his readers through the political developments during the conflict and throughout his book questions why NATO chose to bomb. He suggests that if it were not for an almost guaranteed scenario that no Western casualties would be inflicted during the bombings, NATO likely would not have taken the risk to help quell the repression, murder, rape and pillaging of the Milosevic's forces. War, to Ignatieff, is only "virtual," and not real, when one side can expect to have no losses. Even the size of the NATO force was small: 1,500 in air crews and 30,000 technicians, support staff and administrators.\n"Technological mastery removed death from our experience of war," he writes. "But war without death -- to our side -- is war that ceases to be fully real to us: virtual war."\nAnother question Ignatieff presents is whether risk-free warfare reportedly used for humanitarian reasons is perhaps itself a moral contradiction. "The concept of human rights assumes that all human life is of equal value," he writes.\nWhile President Bush wasn't yet elected when "Virtual War" was published last year, it presents several compelling indictments against those who believe that technology and war without casualties for the United States is entirely the way in which our nation's defenses should move. \n"Technologies create possibilities, but whether they are exploited depends on the ability of essentially conservative institutions to embrace them," he writes.\nAmong a myriad of questions for Western governments to ponder when choosing whether to do battle in another theater sometime in the future when events call for action -- or human rights activists demand it -- is a stinging statement. \n"America and its NATO allies fought a virtual war because they were neither ready nor willing to fight a real one," Ignatieff says.\nThe book is well-worth the $23 (or a trip to the public library) for anyone interested in military affairs or foreign policy.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
As diplomats from around the world meet in Durban, South Africa, at the United Nations' World Conference Against Racism to discuss, among other things, reparations for descendants of slaves and debt cancellation for African countries, it would behoove them to read David Anthony Durham's new novel. \n "Gabriel's Story" is a page-turner about a black family's search for a new life -- and a livelihood -- after the Thirteenth Amendment ended slavery on Independence Day, 1865. \nOf those who left the South, most newly freed slaves packed up what pittance of money and belongings they had, if perchance they had anything other than themselves and what they wore, to head to the North's booming cities in pursuit of work. But in this story, Gabriel's widowed mother chooses to remarry a man who sees virtue in hard-work and dreams of a farm -- in the untamed West. \nSo, Gabriel and his brother head west to Kansas with their mother. They find that their stepfather, Solomon, had been much more generous about the farm's progress than was warranted when he wrote to them in Maryland. \n"'I wish I could be showing you the whole place up and running,' Solomon says, 'but last year was tough, harder than I thought. For everyone, even harder for coloreds.'" \nGabriel balks at life on the Kansas farm, while his mother and younger brother toil on continuously with Solomon, seemingly determined to beat all odds against their success in the new frontier. \nLike most 15-year-old boys, Gabriel and his new friend James hunger for adventure. They meet a band of cowboys, led by a white man named Marshall, who agrees to consider their bid to join his gang, if only they fight each other, he says, because he has only enough work for one of them. \nThe boys reluctantly engage and Marshall chooses them both -- over a white boy whom he'd already hired. \nSoon enough Marshall's group continues on its journey, unknown to the two boys, with stolen horses. Soon, Gabriel and James learn that they've become involved with a band of thieves, rapists and murderers. \nAs the reader follows Gabriel's adventures, Durham occasionally weaves in an italicized narrative of the farm back in Kansas -- an appropriate addition to Durham's impressive first novel, but irritating to read several pages at a time in italics. \nMuch of the novel's seeming purpose is the juxtaposition of Gabriel's family's farming and building a stable home and his own gallivanting across the West on a merciless rampage. Solomon is the epitome of an idealistic, hard-working man intent on making things better than they were. \n"That's what it's all about out here, looking to the future and making it so. This here is a land and a challenge like God intended," he says. \nGabriel eventually finds himself back in Kansas, wiser and more humble and ready to take his place behind the plow he shunned at age 15, and, most importantly, at the family hearth. \nToday's debate on the merits of reparations would be well-served by a quick reading of Durham's book. The role of slavery in American history and even on today's descendants of slaves needs a thorough and robust discussion in America. \nNew York Times editorial observer Brent Staples, himself a descendant of Virginia slaves, writes in that newspaper yesterday that, "The reparations debate is part of a burgeoning discussion about the role of slavery in American history." He says that the story of black people in the United States "is one of extraordinary achievement in the face of gargantuan obstacles. It begins in the waning hours of slavery and continues to this very day."\nThe U.S. government never apologized for slavery or paid direct reparations, with many moderate and conservative elected officials questioning why all taxpayers should be held responsible for 246 years of bondage in which they played no direct part. In 1867, General William Sherman famously promised to provide "40 acres and a mule" to freed slaves, a promise later recanted by President Andrew Johnson. \n"Gabriel's Story" is a welcome addition to the worldwide discussion on the product of slavery. It is at once a well-written novel and a much-needed reminder of a part of American history so many of us seem so easily to forget. The addition of Durham's poetic African-American voice and perspective on history is both needed and appreciated.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
Not since the Vietnam War have Americans given so much attention to the United States foreign policy as we have following Tuesday's terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon across the river from Washington, D.C. Hundreds are already confirmed to have died, hundreds more are missing, and still more are injured. \nAs answers are sought, many Americans might find that a quick review of foreign policy is helpful. And there is arguably no better source of knowledge of foreign policy than former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who served in that role from 1973-77 and as the assistant to the president for National Security Affairs from 1969-75. \nKissinger's new book, "Does America Need A Foreign Policy? Toward a Diplomacy for the 21st Century" (Simon & Schuster, 2001, pp. 318, $30.00), is the best place to begin a study of contemporary United States foreign policy. As with all of his writing, Kissinger's political position is solidly "realist" and conservative and must be understood as biased.\nMany on the left question his positions on, for example, humanitarian intervention and peacekeeping missions, which he argues are a drain on United States military and financial resources. Kissinger believes the United States risks appearing to the rest of the world as a hypocritical superpower simply flexing its military might. \n"The limits of humanitarian (or other) intervention are established by the readiness to pay the necessary price, in casualties or in financial sacrifice," Kissinger writes. \nHe cites examples of where he says the United States should not have involved itself.\n"The American military was deployed in Somalia, initially to help distribute food, then to bring about civilian government," he says, but it "reflected no traditional notion of American national interest." \nNeither did Haiti, Bosnia or Kosovo, but America and her allies were able to save countless lives and help restore peace in those regions. Kissinger is stuck in conservative ideology up to his neck and fails throughout his book to yield to any post-Clinton change in American foreign policy. But his purpose is not to present an unbiased summary of foreign policy: it is to present that summary through a conservative's eyes and then offer suggestions for changes in policy.\nAfter the terrorist incidents of the past week, liberals fear a return to Kissinger's foreign policy, which was barely revised during eight years of a Clinton White House. An already conservative Bush Administration II needs to do little to convince the scared American people that the United States military needs to focus on areas other than humanitarian causes.\nIn seven chapters, America's most famous diplomat reviews changes in international relations, globalization's impact on foreign policy, peace and justice, and delves more closely into our relations with Europe, the Western Hemisphere, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Kissinger discusses at some length United States policy toward a fractured and war-torn Middle East. While the media tends to focus on the Arab-Israeli conflict, the tension between Muslim countries is even more salient. \n"In the last three decades, more wars, and far bloodier ones, have taken place among Muslim countries than between Israel and the Muslim world," Dr. Kissinger writes. \nHe writes that fundamentalist Iran, for example, "feels threatened by secular Iraq and by the fundamentalism of the Taliban in Afghanistan -- more intense than even its own -- which encroaches on Iranian security both from the north and, increasingly, from the east via Pakistan."\nHad the book been written after Tuesday, surely more than one-half dozen references would be made of Afghanistan. But it's a book covering a world full of conflict -- and potential conflict. \nKissinger opens by saying, "At the dawn of the new millennium, the United States is enjoying a preeminence unrivaled by even the greatest empires of the past." Our country has 4 percent of the world's population and consumes 25 percent of its resources. \nThat American preeminence and dominance over the rest of the world, economically and militarily, is exactly why America has become the target of international terrorism.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
Red, yellow, orange and brown.\nThe warm colors of autumn are upon us, and so are a plethora of fall outdoor activities. Scenic Southern Indiana offers many beautiful forests, lakes and recreation areas; all waiting for you to enjoy.\nFor an adventurous student, there are state and national forests for hiking and backpacking, rock climbing, hang gliding, caving and mountain biking. IU Outdoor Adventures activities desk manager Jamie Luce says its most popular activities include rock climbing, skydiving and whitewater rafting. While trips through IU Outdoor Adventures, located on the first floor of the Indiana Memorial Union, generally cost between $70 and $150 for a weekend. Luce says these activities are a great way to meet people who share similar interests. \n"You get to see some new people," says Luce, who spent last weekend backpacking in Big South Fork National Park in Kentucky with a group of eight people from IU. "Getting out of Bloomington is really nice."\nSuch trips provide participants with the chance to learn leadership skills, get away from campus life and enjoy the season's beautiful color and lack of bugs. Luce says it's a great time to be outdoors with another person. \n"It's romantic," she says. "And you can snuggle up with someone by the campfire."\nAll within a short drive, Yellowood Lake (in Brown County between Bloomington and Nashville), Morgan-Monroe State Forest (about 12 miles north of Bloomington on Old State Road 37), Lake Lemon (seven miles northeast of campus on State Road 45, then three miles on Tunnel Road), Brown County State Park (also in Brown County between Bloomington and Nashville) and other parks are a 15- to 20-minute drive from campus. \nSouthern Indiana is hilly and unglaciated, making for scenic, beautiful views at area parks. \nAt 1,050 feet, Weedpatch Hill in Brown County State Park is this area's highest point. \nStacy Mathies, an interpretive naturalist at Brown County State Park with the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, says the park sees an increase in visitors in October each year because of the fall colors and weather. \n"More visitors come here in the fall for the overlooks," Mathies says.\nVisitors also enjoy 12 to 15 miles of trails in the park, ranging from a short, accessible trail to a three-mile trail, Mathies says. Also available are naturalist activities and interpretive talks at the park's Nature Center, which has a number of displays, a bird observation room and an active bee hive. \nFees for the park, which sees almost 2 million visitors each year, are $3 for in-state and $5 for out-of-state vehicles. The Nature Center is open Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Saturday and Sunday from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. \nPerhaps the most overlooked scenic spot is the IU campus itself. Another picturesque area is the near-campus region, particularly the area bordered on the north by Seventh Street, south by Third Street, west by Indiana Avenue and east by Jordan Avenue. Beech, maple and tulip poplar are among the native trees along the many paths and trails through campus. \nMany consider the sugar maple tree on the west side of Goodbody Hall to be the campus' most spectacular fall foliage.\nSenior Laura Murray doesn't need a car to enjoy the Bloomington outdoors. In the past, she has ran from her dorm room to Griffy Lake to take the trails there. \n"I enjoy running in the fall," Murray says. "It's much cooler and the leaves are turning, so it's more colorful."\nSenior Rachel Atz also spends time at Griffy.\n"I go to Griffy, to the dam and Sycamore Valley," Atz says.\nBut her favorite park this time of year is McCormick's Creek. \n"It's the best place to go for hiking in a group, because of the wide trails," she says. "And the cave is interesting.\n"It's good to get some fresh air and solitude sometimes," Atz continues. "A lot of students aren't from around Bloomington, so it's important to take this opportunity to learn about and enjoy other landscapes."\nMonroe County itself has several lakes that offer trails for hiking, backpacking and, when not too cold, swimming. Besides Lake Griffy, south of Bloomington is Lake Monroe, which is surrounded by Hoosier National Forest; northeast is Lake Lemon. All three have served as sources of water for Bloomington.\nSophomore Leigh Frame also says being outdoors is relaxing and a good way to get away from campus life.\n"It's healthy to get outside of your immediate home," Frame says. "It helps you learn where things are and get a better view of where you're living."\nFrames says there are many places in Bloomington and Brown County, for example, just waiting for students to take advantage of.\nThe Convention and Visitors Bureau, 2855 N. Walnut, has more information for those who want to learn about outdoor activities in the area. "Nature Walks in Southern Indiana" by Alan McPherson (Sierra Club, $15.95) covers nearly every hiking trail, park and recreation area available. IU Outdoor Adventures may be reached at 855-2231.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
During its 98-year history, the Mu Phi Epsilon music fraternity has sought to enrich local communities with free concerts and recitals, community service projects and music education and appreciation classes.\nThe national organization was founded in 1893 at the Metropolitan College of Music in Cincinnati, originally as a sorority, and later admitting men and women. The Bloomington chapter has 27 collegiate members and 29 patron, or alumni, members. The local chapter generally holds six to eight concerts or recitals each year, some of which are held on campus and some at local retirement centers.\n"We give concerts at retirement homes where we sing for residents," graduate student Nasrin Hekmat-Farrokh, the fraternity's chapter president, said. "We also hold a concert series with no admission fee." \nFarrokh joined Mu Phi Epsilon as an undergraduate at the University of Southern California. \nThe group's most recent concert, Oct. 14, featured a discussion of Samuel Barber's opera "Vanessa" and a mini-recital by soprano Beth Wininger, a fraternity alumna. Butler University Associate professor Wayne C. Wentzel lectured on the underlying themes in "Vanessa," identifying selections with various motives throughout and playing them for audience members. \nWininger and pianist Charles Prestinari, a doctoral student, performed selections from "Hermit Songs" (1953) and "A Green Lowland of Pianos, Op. 45, No. 2" (1974). Distinguished professor Giorgio Tozzi then spoke on his part in creating the role of the doctor in that opera at the Metropolitan Opera in 1958. \nThe Recital Hall audience of between 40-50 people, some from the group's Terre Haute chapter, asked questions of both Wentzel and Tozzi.\nIn addition to free events for the public, the fraternity provides forums for students to question music professionals and teachers, many from among the fraternity's own alumni, Farrokh said. Members also donate items to the IU music library and provide music appreciation classes and music therapy to special populations.\n"We use music as therapy," Farrokh said. "Many (music) artists at IU are involved."\nMu Phi Epsilon also has an alumni chapter in Bloomington, which works with the collegiate chapter in all of its various events and programs. Members pledged as collegiate members and are offered the opportunity to continue in the honorary chapter.\nMargaret Strong, a 50-plus year member of the fraternity, said "the group is dedicated to supporting the student chapter, service to the community and general musical events."\nAmong the most distinguished alumni are the Sterling Patrons, Strong said, who are chosen by the national organization. \n"The distinction is given for musicianship and service to their community," Strong said. \nAt IU, former Dean of the School of Music Charles Webb and Distinguished professor David Baker and Professor David Effron are all Sterling Patrons. \n"The group encourages music scholarship, fraternity among members and service projects, such as performances at Beverly (Healthcare)," Strong said. "We've been doing that for years."\nFor Strong and other alumni, the performance and appreciation of music is a lifelong commitment. Nasrin Farrokh agrees.\n"What would life be without music?" Farrokh asked. "We believe in music and the nobleness of all the arts."\nThe fraternity hosts its next concert Sunday, Nov. 4, with violinist Jorge Avila, this year's international Mu Phi Epsilon competition winner. Patron member David Baker, a distinguished professor of the music school, will be honored at the group's Nov. 11 Founders Day recital, 7 p.m. in Recital Hall.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
Several dozen peace activists marched from their peace camp in Dunn Meadow to the intersection of Third Street and College Mall Road Saturday, encountering mixed reaction from passers-by. \nThe protesters sought to express concern about U.S. bombing in Afghanistan in response to the Sept. 11 attacks on Washington and New York. \nProfessor Emeritus of Philosophy Milton Fisk said those who oppose the military campaign, now a distinct minority, support action to halt global terrorism, but not the action undertaken by President George W. Bush. \n"We want some kind of justice, but we differ on the means," Fisk said. "We cannot say 'go ahead' with the war."\nDuring their march, protesters encountered mixed reaction, although most onlookers were supporting the war. \nOne man rolled down his window as he drove by on College Mall Road to yell: "What's your solution?"\nMarcher Peter Drake, a graduate student, said in lieu of bombing, the United States should work in coordination with international law enforcement agencies to track down terrorists, cut off funding to terrorist organizations and involve the United Nations more in the response. \nSome protesters suggested the United States should stop supporting repressive regimes in oil-producing countries. \n"Only in that way can we stamp out the problems that cause terrorism," Fisk said. \nDrake said he worries that the U.S. bombing will simply work to aggravate the terrorist groups, propelling them into taking further action. \n"This could escalate and blow up," Drake said. "The goal has moved from dealing with terrorism to taking the Taliban out of power."\nBut some passers-by associated the peace protesters with the terrorists. \n"You all need to be sent to Afghanistan," one woman shouted. \nMoments later, another driver associated the marchers with Afghanistan, yelling, "Get a life. Go back."\nDespite the reaction, marchers said they wanted the public to know that some opposition to the U.S./U.K.-led campaign does exist.\n"I think we are not getting a fair share of media and there are many people who are against the war, but they feel they are in a minority," said Bloomington resident Reza Pishghi. "Actions like this help get the message out that there are others." \nSome passers-by showed support for the protesters' message with a thumbs-up sign or a honk and a wave.\nOpponents of the bombing said they do not distinguish between the lives of Americans and those of Afghans, be they in Los Angeles or Kabul. All life, they said, is sacred. \nA passer-by disagreed: "Bomb the hell out of them."\nRegion editor Stacy Kess contributed to this story.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
A Tuesday morning fire kept firefighters busy into the afternoon putting out remaining hot spots. \nFire spread through a warehouse at 316 S. Washington St. around 2:30 a.m. Bloomington Police Officer Tiffany Willingham was on duty when she noticed the fire. Fire crews were dispatched at 2:56 a.m.\nMinutes later, fire crews were on the scene and found heavy smoke covering the area and flames shooting through the roof of the building.\nCrews poured water on the building from the south side to protect the adjacent building north of the warehouse, both owned by Bloomington resident R. J. Phelps. Firefighters evacuated an elderly woman from her apartment above Modern Cleaners, 112 E. Third St., because of thick smoke.\nAs firefighters began battling the flames, the south wall collapsed, followed by the front of the building and roof, distributing debris along South Washington.\nThe fire kept traffic blocked from the 300 to 400 blocks of South Washington, the 100 block of East Smith Street and the eastbound lane in the 100 block of East Third Street until late in the afternoon.\nWater from the fire hose ran a foot deep away from the building as crews doused the flames from the roof of the adjacent building, University Publishing Corporation, 310 S. Washington St. \n"We didn't make an interior attack because of the strength of fire," said Fire Captain Rick Petermichel. "We knew it was a vacant building so we didn't want to risk anybody's life."\nPhelps said he received a phone call around 3:30 a.m. in response to a building alarm.\n"When we got down here, the thing was gone, and I live 10 minutes away from here," he said.\nPhelps purchased the warehouse about a year ago and has been using it for overflow storage of books from University Publishing and for furniture from his rental properties. His red Chevrolet truck -- covered in bricks -- stuck out from what remained of the building.\n"And there she is," he said, pointing to his truck.\n Fire investigator Scott Smith said he doesn't expect the investigation to be complete until sometime early today.\n"It's pretty common for a warehouse fire -- middle of the night," he said.\nPhelps said he could not estimate the damage, but he said he purchased the building for "a couple hundred thousand dollars."\n"Whatever it is, it's total," he said. "Right now, I'm probably just going to wait and see."\nPhelps said he was not sure what caused the fire, but he speculated that it was electrical.\n"I'm just assuming that the old building has some electrical problems," he said.\nBackhoes dug through wood and brick from the building's rear just after sunrise from the alley.\n"We're hauling it off as we put (the fire) out," Petermichel said.\nCrews piled the debris in a parking lot behind the building as firefighters continued to hose down hotspots.\nSmoke continued to billow hours later from the building's remaining hotspots, leaving much of the area in a light haze.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
Native American flautist Robert Mirabal brought his show "Music From A Painted Cave" to the IU Auditorium last Thursday. An ensemble of native dancers, singers and the "Rare Tribal Mob" band joined Mirabal as he mixed traditional Native American music with more modern American influences. \nA nearly empty Auditorium enjoyed Mirabal's music, which worked its way from traditional Native American music to modern rock and roll-style songs. Unfortunately, the mixture proved less than impressive.\nThe show was fractured and lacked coherence, with the exception of the mixture of old and new styles. Mirabal struggled with how his ancient roots fit with modern American culture. In Mirabal's case, modern America won in the end.\nMirabal's band includes Bloomington resident Kenny Aronoff. The album was produced by another Bloomington resident, Mark Hood. The post-production work for the CD was performed at Echo Park Studios in Bloomington.\nMirabal's music brings together his Taos heritage and American mainstream music, which he says is like "running a footrace with the wind." His music speaks to the plight of the Native American in modern America. \n"As soon as I began playing, people would ask me to perform," Mirabal said in a press release. "They say the flute chooses you, and it certainly has changed my life. Since then, I've spent most of my time traveling and playing music."\nIn addition to being a performer, Mirabal is also an author, actor, screenwriter and flute maker. A native of New Mexico, Mirabal creates his melodies based on the rituals that have surrounded him during his life at Taos Pueblo, where he lives to this day. That aspect of his culture became less apparent as the performance continued. \nThe mixture of traditional and modern influences in Mirabal's music is a reflection of how modern American society has destroyed the traditional Native American way of life. The two hours of Mirabal's show attempted to open the audience's eyes to what has happened to Native American culture in the several hundred years since the white man "discovered" what already existed and "civilized" it. \n"My culture doesn't allow me to record anything traditional," Mirabal said in the release. "But my music is informed by the ceremonial music that I've heard all of my life. What I create comes out of my body and soul, in desire to take care of the spirits of the earth."\nMirabal introduced each song, at times with long, meandering stories. Other times he would attempt a joke. The narratives had the potential to present important stories and educate Mirabal's audience. Instead, some lacked focus, forcing worthy ideas and narrative to go unnoticed. \nMirabal's theatrical and eclectic show is based on a popular concert he taped for PBS that first aired this spring. The PBS show consistently ranked among PBS' top programs and received multiple showings in dozens of markets around the country. Mirabal's CD entered Billboard's Top Ten New Age list within two weeks of its release. Mirabal's awards include being named amazon.com's Best New Age Artist for 2000 and Songwriter of the Year in 1998, 2000 and 2001 at the Native American Music Awards.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
Local public radio station WFIU/103.7FM has begun a week of fund-raising amid decreased federal subsidies and reduced citizen support for public radio. Local stations and National Public Radio have adapted to their financial situations by seeking increased support from program underwriters.\nPublic broadcasting has been in a steady and rapid worldwide decline during the last decade. Robert McChesney notes in his book "Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times" (New Press, $17.95) that "the collapse of public broadcasting makes perfect sense, as it really no longer has justification to exist." \nPublic broadcasting has two historic reasons to exist, writes McChesney, a professor at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. First, public broadcasting maintains "public control over a scarce broadcast spectrum" and second, it provides socially beneficial programs "that the few commercial broadcasters would find insufficiently profitable to produce." \nMcChesney writes that the notion of a scarce broadcasting spectrum "no longer holds water." \nWith access to hundreds of channels now on television, radio, and the Internet, the government has no real need to subsidize certain kinds of broadcasting programs. \nMcChesney takes issue with the total commercial nature of radio and television broadcasting that now entirely dominates American society. \n"Commercial values now dominate the media and political culture," he writes. Public broadcasting is the noncommercial solution to the problem McChesney sees. He wants to believe public broadcasting can continue "if a movement on its behalf is part of a broader democratic movement to lessen the corporate and commercial domination of society at large."\nIn the last decade, public radio has changed in fundamental ways because of cuts in funding from its traditional source, the federal government. Most striking to listeners is sponsor identification, which now resemble advertisements on commercial stations so much that public and private stations are hardly distinguishable. National Public Radio, which Washington established several decades ago to counter the solely commercial nature of radio, has extended its sponsor identifications from only reading a sponsor's name to giving descriptions of a sponsor, an 800-number and Web site addresses. \nThis trend in public radio is disturbing to listeners who believe public radio should be just that -- public radio, not commercial radio with advertisements. NPR and local stations are not to blame for their commercialization. Drastic funding cuts by Washington have forced them to increase funding revenues from outside sponsors and listeners themselves. Combined, NPR and its sister on television, the Public Broadcasting Service, account for around only $1.12 per year per person in federal taxes. \nA radio history scholar, McChesney argues for this movement through an analysis of radio's history, from its inception immediately after World War I to the present. He writes of the debates around the developed world over whether airwaves should be monopolized by the government or should be opened up for use by private, commercial stations.\nThe United States and Great Britain are McChesney's examples of the two extremes in this debate. The U.S. went commercial, giving control of its airwaves to NBC and CBS; Britain, conversely, ceded its airwaves to a public institution, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The public-commercial debate's outcome was different in each country. Broadcasting was an international phenomenon -- not only was the public-private debate international, but messages from one national broadcasting system are often audible in surrounding countries. \nCanada's struggle with choosing its broadcasting path highlighted the inherently international dimension of broadcast policy making, McChesney writes. It retained close ties to Britain and the BBC, but its people could frequently hear U.S. broadcasting stations on their radios. But non-commercial forces won, and Canadian radio was nationalized. The Canadian government chose the Canadian Radio League, in part, from a compilation of several factors, including: \n• "inescapable evidence of dissatisfaction" with commercial radio in the U.S.\n• commercial radio's neglect of public affairs and education\n• a potential "threat to Canadian culture and political autonomy" and\n• traditional close ties with Great Britain and its Broadcasting Corporation.\nMcChesney writes that the work of the Canadian "public broadcasting activists is a continual reminder that control over broadcasting must always be the duty of the citizenry in a democratic society." \nPublic broadcasting's supporters must regain a sense of connection between public broadcasting and democratic politics. The type of society we choose for ourselves -- whether one dominated by commercial, for-profit interests or one based on democratic principles -- will, in part, be partly influenced by the future of radio and television communications. McChesney leaves us to consider whether society will be "based on 'one dollar, one vote' rather than 'one person, one vote'"
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
About 25-30 protesters gathered outside Staples on Tuesday to raise awareness about what they say is the company's use of old-growth and publicly owned forests in paper products.\nThe local protest was part of a second national day of action organized by environmental organizations, including ForestEthics and EarthFirst!, to bring the issue to consumers' attention.\nStaples says there is no evidence to show it has used any old-growth forest products and that it carries almost 400 recycled paper products in its stores, including paper towels, Post-It notes and copy paper.\n"We've never been presented with any evidence from environmental groups that our products carry old-growth," said Tom Nutile, Staples vice-president of public relations. "We care very much about the environment at Staples and we have a tremendous track record. We've been working hard to bring recycled paper."\nAt least one protester disagreed.\n"Walk around the paper aisles in Staples," sophomore Liam Mulholland said. "Recycled paper is only 30 percent. That's not completely recycled."\nImmediately noticeable at the Bloomington protest was a large banner in large red and black capital letters completely covering Staples' store-front sign reading, "Staples/No. 1 Old-Growth/Forests Destroyer."\nProtesters on the ground said they didn't know who put the sign up, but they had their own hand-held signs with the same message. About 10 Bloomington Police Department officers were present in the event they were needed.\n"It's unfair and the message is inaccurate," Nutile said when told of the banner. "One thing that is driving us is that we care about the environment. We'd also like to be able to achieve a profit."\nStaples has met twice with two environmental groups, ForestEthics and the Dogwood Alliance, in an effort to change the company's purchasing policy, Nutile said. \n"In terms of endangered wood, we're putting the finishing touches on a purchasing policy that will formalize a commitment to environmentally-friendly products," Nutile said. "It would likely give preference to suppliers who use wood from forests that certify as being sustainably managed."\nProtesters weren't convinced by Staples efforts since national protests Nov. 15, 2000. \n"We're just out here to raise public awareness," said sophomore Stacey Mcdaris. "They're the No. 1 destroyer of old-growth forests. We're here to promote responsible consumerism."\nA few people who entered Staples through the protesters didn't seem supportive.\n"They told us to grow up," Bloomington resident Emily Winter said.\nMulholland said because Staples is the largest office supply store in the world, its impact on the environment is significant. \n"Just through their paper sales and some of the deals they make, they are really hurting our national forests," Mulholland said. "Less than three percent of our old-growth forests remain."\nProtesters said repeatedly that there are alternatives to buying old-growth products. They say until Staples gives in to their demands, consumers should boycott the chain and use alternative office supply stores.\nBesides the use of old-growth wood, Joshua Martin of the Indiana Forest Alliance said he also opposes use of public forests for paper products. \n"We don't support commercial logging on public lands," Martin said. "A major focus of the Staples action is national forests."\nMartin said national and state governments shouldn't subsidize for-profit logging interests by providing logging roads and low-cost trees. \n"They should focus on ecological values, rather than the economic values," Martin said. "The U.S. taxpayers subsidize logging in national forests by nearly $1 billion per year. Common sense says we shouldn't be paying corporations to log the public forests."\nThe protesters said they plan to continue their campaign by working to educate consumers, writing letters and participating in a national call-in day to Staples offices.\n"Staples is personally responsible for the clear-cutting of old-growth forests," Mcdaris said. "We want everyone to boycott Staples"
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
In a world that is more interconnected than ever before, economic globalization is a reality. But global trade and investment need not include a race to the bottom in wages, unsafe working conditions and environmental degradation.\nThe North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, has meant just that for many workers and their communities. Manufacturing jobs in Bloomington and around the United States are moving to Mexico, where labor is cheap and standards for workers' health and safety and environmental protections sorely inadequate. Organized labor estimates that in its seven years, NAFTA has cost American workers 700,000 manufacturing jobs and 31,000 in Indiana. \nBut there are winners under NAFTA: Big multinational corporations have made a bundle while the workers and environment suffer.\nNow the Bush Administration and those companies want to expand the free trade zone to all of the Western Hemisphere, except for Cuba. The secret Free Trade Area of the Americas would include 34 new Central and South American countries in an agreement that mirrors NAFTA. And think of all that cheap labor down south! \nIn Mexico, wages are lower than they were before NAFTA was enacted in 1994, as are poverty levels. NAFTA has pitted worker against worker in competing for much needed jobs across borders. President Bush wants to extend the competition from three countries (Canada, Mexico and the United States) to 37. \nTrade agreements should include enforceable protections for workers rights, human rights and the environment. NAFTA does the opposite. It allows corporations to challenge laws in secret tribunals to demand compensation from governments when they feel such protections have lowered their profits. When a Mexican state refused to allow Metaclas Corp. to build on an ecological preserve, the company successfully used NAFTA to demand more than $16 million in compensation from the Mexican government.\nTo speed along FTAA and other trade agreements without appropriate consideration in Congress, President Bush is working for passage of Fast Track legislation. Fast Track would prohibit Congress from amending a trade agreement that is negotiated by the president, allowing only an up-or-down vote in Congress and prohibiting the addition of enforceable protection for workers rights and the environment. \nAs it stands, Fast Track would aid powerful corporations searching the globe for cheap labor lowering standards globally for workers rights, public health, consumers and the environment, according to the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations Website. \nKen Zeller, president of the Indiana AFL-CIO, said "Congress speaks for the people," Zeller said. "To take their voice away takes our voice away." Ordinary citizens' groups have been locked out of the FTAA negotiations. \nIt's time that unions, environmentalists, farmers and other groups representing interests other than those of the multinational corporations be allowed not only to see a copy of the proposed FTAA agreement, but also to have a seat at the negotiating table.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
When Republicans swept the 1994 elections, gaining majorities in both houses of Congress, they set their sights on several policy areas, not the least of which was reforming welfare. With the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, signed into law by President William Clinton on August 22, 1996, they succeeded in ending the nation's 61-year-old federal guarantee of cash assistance. \nThe legislation scrapped the old federal welfare program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), and instituted in its place a reformed version, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). The goal of the Republican-led reform movement was to replace what many saw as a permanent system of cash handouts to single mothers with a program that would encourage both work and the formation and maintenance of two-parent homes. A little over five years later, welfare rolls are down and the number of two-parent households is up. But while reform has moved people into work, it has not always lifted them from poverty.\nIn 1995, the State of Indiana began implementing changes to its welfare program. Key changes included an end to funding additional children born to a mother already receiving assistance, limits of two years of assistance, requirements that children attend school regularly, and cash subsidies to employers to hire welfare recipients, according to the Indiana Coalition on Housing and Homeless Issues. \nBy 1997, "more than half of the 14,428 cases closed in Indiana in a three-month period resulted from sanctions, not from people taking jobs," Michael B. Katz writes in his 2001 book, "The Price of Citizenship: Redefining the American Welfare State." "State officials saw in the high sanction rates proof of the new welfare law's effectiveness." \nIndeed, welfare reform's proponents across the country measured "success" in the numbers of welfare recipients on a state's rolls before and after reforms were implemented.\nThe assumption in Indiana's TANF system is that pushing single parents into work of some kind, even low-wage jobs without benefits, will make them self-sufficient and, in turn, contributors to society as a whole, rather than a financial drain on it. Reformers say a swift kick in the butt will give recipients the necessary incentive to move into the workplace.\nBut there are many barriers to work for recipients, according to an Urban Institute study: language, children on Supplemental Security Income, education levels, physical and mental disabilities, young children requiring continual care and poor or non-existent work histories.\nSome scholars also argue many recipients are already in "the workplace."\nTaking care of children, they say, is a job in itself. To reformers, there is a clear division of work into "productive" work done outside the home and the "unproductive"work done in the home. The goal is to move mothers into marketable jobs outside the home. Reformers place little value on the work necessary to raise a family, which is especially difficult for these single mothers. Stereotypes of women on welfare lead us to believe they simply sit in front of the television all day, engaging in no worthwhile activity. \n More and more poor Hoosiers, and Americans, are being left behind by a system unable to help them, even temporarily, during such tough financial times. Katz writes that much of American welfare reform is propelling society toward "a future of increased inequality and decreased security as individuals compete for success in an open market with ever fewer protections against misfortune, power, and greed."\nWith Indiana's new budget crunch impacting almost every area of state spending, Governor Frank O'Bannon and legislators must not forget the importance of providing sufficient funding to Indiana's needy families. If we intend for welfare reform truly to work, we must allocate sufficient resources to that effort, especially in poor economic times.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
Just before the events of Sept. 11, the United States military had been undergoing a much-needed national debate on what course it will take for securing our defense in the years to come. \nThe U.S. faces new threats in the 21st Century and must be reformed to counter those threats. Now, more than ever, we are faced with the possibility that rogue states and terrorist groups will use chemical, biological and nuclear weapons -- or our own planes as missiles. \nTwo possible paths have emerged in Washington's delayed discussion on military readiness and capabilities. \nOne plan would have the military hold on to its traditional policy of being ready to engage and win two major conflicts in different parts of the world simultaneously. The other, which is being proposed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other top military brass, has caused some fierce discussion in conservative circles. It calls for scrapping the two-front war approach and instituting a policy of preparedness for one major war, while also being able to engage in a "holding-action" in another, smaller conflict. \nUnder the traditional plan, our military is structured in such a way that its forces can go full-force and win in two distant lands at the same time. That means we need enough tanks, soldiers, planes, ships and such to take on, for example, both Iraq and North Korea. \nIt's an outdated approach that must be changed.\nThe Rumsfeld proposal describes four areas of military engagement: The ability to "win decisively" one major conflict or war; to defend U.S. soil; to maintain U.S. troop deployments around the world, and to engage in limited, smaller-scale conflicts. Mr. Rumsfeld and others in the Bush defense team are partially right in their analysis of where the military should put its emphasis for change in the coming years.\nMissing from their list is an emphasis on coalition building and diplomacy. Before the conflict in Afghanistan showed the Bush Administration just how wrong it was about the need for the U.S. to be engaged in the international community, the trend from January to September was toward American isolationism. The conservative isolationist foreign policy of the Bush team replaced a Clinton team more willing to involve itself in humanitarian missions, peace negotiations and nation building. Our commitment to these important foreign policy tools was lost in January 2001 and is only being regained -- likely temporarily -- to further our objectives in Afghanistan.\nJust as candidate Bush scorned nation-building, President Bush is doing it in Afghanistan today, with a new government freshly installed. A generally unilateralist approach to foreign policy shifted on Sept. 11.\nAnd just as candidate Bush railed against big, intrusive government, President Bush has overseen massive increases in the federal government's reach into our lives.\nHow does it look to other nations for the U.S. to turn its back to humanitarian missions, peace negotiations, international treaties and other commitments to our allies? Bush would have us pull out of the Balkans, cease negotiations with warring peoples in an effort to find a peaceful resolution, abandon the Kyoto Protocol and Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and build a diplomatic wall around our borders.\nAnd how does it look to other nations for the U.S. to turn its back on individual freedoms, supposedly protected by our Constitution? Bush would have our right to a public trial by jury and to be confronted by two sworn witnesses (act of terrorism) taken away.\nLet's fight terrorism with a strong, capable military, backed up with appropriate intelligence and international diplomacy.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
The central issue in United States policy toward Iraq is the threat of weapons of mass destruction and what the international community should do to defuse that threat. The Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, has spent almost two decades acquiring these inherently offensive weapons and their delivery systems. "The greatest threat to life on earth is weapons of mass destruction -- nuclear, chemical, biological," writes Richard Butler, former chairman of the United Nations Special Commission, which was charged with inspecting Iraq regularly for weapons violations. In his 2000 book, "The Greatest Threat: Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Crisis of Global Security," Butler argues the U.N. must act to eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. \nThe Bush administration announced Sunday it wants new leadership for Iraq, a position his father, President George H.W. Bush, fell short of achieving during the Gulf War. Many argued then that to remove Hussein after the war would have meant total disaster, caused by the power vacuum his absence would have created. Various clans and factions within and surrounding Iraq would certainly vie for control as soon as Hussein's repressive regime were defeated.\nBush said if Hussein continues to deny international weapons inspectors access, options for removing him include military action.\n"The United States reserves its option to do whatever it believes might be appropriate to see if there can be a regime change," Secretary of State Colin Powell said Sunday. "U.S. policy is that, regardless of what the inspectors do, the people of Iraq and the people of the region would be better off with a different regime in Baghdad."\nUnited Nations Resolutions 687 and 1154 require Iraq to eliminate its "weapons of mass destruction while also accounting for Kuwaiti citizens kidnapped or killed by Iraqi forces." The Clinton administration pledged to end economic sanctions against Iraq if it met the conditions of the UN resolutions. But then-Secretary of State Madeline Albright said the U.S. would not lift sanctions while Hussein was still in power. That now seems to be the Bush team's stance. \nBush could call for a costly ground invasion of Iraq -- with potentially heavy loss of life among U.S. soldiers or rely primarily on bombing. Modern air power certainly comes closest to fulfilling the goal of achieving policy and military objectives with the fewest civilian and military casualties. If military force is required, then air power is preferable to the use of ground forces -- although even they may be necessary to complete the task (e.g., Operation Desert Storm).\nBefore any bombing or invasion to remove Hussein, the Bush foreign policy team must be certain that a replacement government -- or series of regional governments -- is available to fill the void left by Hussein's departure. The US government has consistently aided Iraqi opposition groups in their bids to overthrow Hussein, allowing the people of Iraq to work from within themselves, without direct U.S. intervention. Simply removing Hussein will destabilize the Middle East at a delicate time. Obviously economic sanctions and U.S. financial support to opposition groups in Iraq have not crippled Hussein in the least. But sanctions seem to have crippled the common Iraqi people. \nHussein continues to be a strong threat to the United States. Perhaps it's time for more decisive military action against Iraq, as Bush suggests may happen.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
Judging from the voter turnout in Indiana's May 7 primary elections, an outside observer might surmise that voters' hands were chopped off after the last elections. Twenty-two percent of voters in Indiana cast ballots. \nBut a disparate turnout was found this week in the western African nation of Sierra Leone, which has seen more bloodshed, among innocent civilians, government soldiers and rebels alike, than many of us care to imagine. No Hollywood war movie can capture the ruthless maiming and killing of women and children that has gone on for years in Sierra Leone. After elections in 1996, Revolutionary United Front rebels rejected the election results and chopped off the hands of voters whom they said supported the government. \nThis week's elections in Sierra Leone, which has not officially been at war since January, saw over an 80 percent turnout in the capital of Freetown with other results not yet available. \nUnited Nations armed forces and a strong British military presence at polling stations helped ensure free and fair elections across the country. \nAssociated Press photos of Sierra Leone's long, winding lines of hundreds of voters in the hot African sun stand in stark contrast to the empty polling places in Monroe County, Ind., last week. Five of 98 precincts in the county had no voters at all and rarely did a polling place have more voters than it did paid election workers. \nAmong Sierra Leone's thousands of amputees, hundreds waited in one line to vote at a camp for war amputees. \n"After these elections there will be permanent peace," Hassan Bah, an amputee, told the AP. "We are ready now to cast our vote for prosperity and democracy."\nPreliminary results show incumbent President Ahmed Tejan Kabbah with a commanding lead over RUF-backed Pallo Bangura.\nWhile Sierra Leonean voters might have waited hours, it took me less than five minutes to push a few white buttons for my choices for local, state and federal elections. \nIU students who had left Bloomington by May 7 had the option of voting absentee (by mail or in person before they left) or voting at their permanent residence. If even just a portion of IU's student body voted, we could entirely change local elections and heavily influence state and federal races. \nWe don't need armed UN troops and tanks to guard our polling places. But perhaps it would take armed force to get some people to the polls. What a sad state of affairs. Our government's diplomats go around the world preaching democracy in countries with voter turnout much higher than our own. Is it really that hard to find five minutes between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. one day a year?\nThere is still plenty of time to register to vote for the Nov. 5 general election. Registration forms are available at a number of locations on campus and in Bloomington, including the Registrar's Office in Franklin Hall; the Voter Registration Office in the Justice Building, 301 N. College Ave.; and the City Clerk's Office in City Hall, 401 N. Morton St.
(07/25/02 8:23pm)
ZANESVILLE, Ohio -- Sometime around 9 p.m. Tuesday eastbound at about 75 mph on I-70, headed to a job interview in Maryland, my alternator belt broke. The Mercury Mountaineer I was driving overheated quickly, but not as fast as my power steering went out. \nI pulled off the interstate and called for the tow truck that took me to a hotel to stew over a lost job opportunity and my decommissioned SUV to the town's Ford dealer. Of course, no one in Zanesville would fix my car in the middle of the night to get me to Maryland with enough time to spare for my 7 a.m. interview.\nI woke up around 5:30 a.m. and tried to do without my six newspapers by watching one of three options for morning television news: ABC, NBC and CBS. I rarely watch television news, except "The News Hour with Jim Lehrer" on PBS, because TV news programs aren't news programs. They're human interest stories programs. This morning's news on ABC, NBC and CBS consisted of five minutes of quick soundbites of headlines like Chandra Levy's murder and reorganizing the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Then we quickly turned to such important topics as a woman's manicure infecting her with Herpes and interviews with Ben Affleck and Morgan Freeman about a new movie. Then it's onto weather and traffic for the Columbus area. \nFlipping back to national news: cooking lessons. Then a so-called story on a story -- a journalist interviewing another journalist about a story about prescription drugs airing later that day. I know morning news on these networks isn't intended to make the nation's citizenry more informed. And polls will likely show these stories are ones people want to watch, but the media has an obligation to tell us about important events and issues, even if we don't want to know. \nSo, Wednesday morning I sat in my hotel room as blind to world events as I could be. All I knew is that we're still fighting a war on terrorism. I didn't know about an important Supreme Court decision on 11th Amendment issues, other cases involving free speech/cross burning, effective counsel and conspiracy law, that a U.S. plane was downed in Iraq, or many, many other important issues that must have failed whatever poll was done on viewers' interests. \nEvening news broadcasts aren't much better. They are full of human interest and feature stories that have little to do with the hard news viewers should hear. Technology could have made television news a great source of information for viewers, rivaling print sources. With video cameras around the world and correspondents in many countries, immediate television news could be heard and seen, not just read. \nThat's what CNN did for the world. But the national broadcast news media is failing across the board. Producers are looking at perhaps installing new anchors to shore-up falling viewerships. \nIn the meantime, I walked around town and found a copy of The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal to tide me over until the car was fixed for $166. \nI will continue to rely on my delivered paper copies of The Herald-Times, The Indianapolis Star, The Chicago Tribune, The New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor and The Financial Times each morning. Some say I waste paper, money and time by investing in these everyday -- I don't think so. Of course they come with good coffee and not that hotel version I was stuck with when I woke up.
(03/25/02 4:27am)
Kirkwood was declared winner of an IU Student Association election riddled with Elections Code violations, so many that students had to wait four weeks from when elections ended to hear the results. What is particularly disturbing about violations this year is that those with the potential to alter the election's outcome only merited a fine by the Elections Commission, a decision upheld by a divided IUSA Supreme Court. Other less serious charges against Synergy and Steel were thrown out by the commission. \nThe commission levied a $700 fine against Kirkwood for sending mass e-mails and for its "Votetracker" e-mails used to intimidate greek pledges. That means anyone who can afford to run for IUSA and pay the fines associated with an IUSA campaign can add a line to his resume. Choose from student body president, senator and more. President runs for around $250, senator for $35. In addition to the resume, executives are paid and receive "A" parking permits.\nViolations of the Elections Code that have significant potential to change election results should entirely disqualify a ticket, while less serious offenses (some of us think handing out condoms is a violation) warrant a fine. I've served twice as an IUSA senator and once as an associate director. I know that IUSA can make an impact on campus for students, as it has before. But it must be seen as legitimate to do so.\nUnless students and the IU administration see IUSA elections as fair, and until more students vote, IUSA has lost much of its legitimacy.